2020-best long range scope

I don't know much about long range hunting, so I'm hoping to learn more about it here. On the other hand I know a great deal about optics and long range shooting competition, so I'm hoping that knowledge is transferable.

The riflescope on my rifle right now is a March-X 5-50X56. I've had it close to 6 years now and it's steered close to 20,000 rounds in competition, without a burp. I've shot about 100 local matches, 6 Nationals, 12 State and 2 Worlds with my current setup. (Been through 4 barrels.)

Now, my loads are nowhere the recoil of a 338-378, but the rifle is unbraked and shot from prone. My bullet of choice was 210 gr .308 for the longest time and I recently moved up to a 230gr bullet. The recoil accumulates over time. I can tell you that after a 10 day World competition, my shoulder is tender.

The scope never burped or had issues. I selected this March-X because they are built like tanks, their main tubes are 4mm thick instead of 2mm like the Nightforces and others. They are machined from bar stock aluminum, not pressure molded, (they do that for all their scopes.) The glass is ED and the minimum focus is 10 yards. I usually run it at 40X and the ED glass helps me with the mirage. The really neat thing, and this is important in my chosen discipline, is that the weight of this scope is only 31 ounces, a full half pound less than my Nighforce NXS 12-42X56 and a **** sight brighter.

March now has Super-ED glass in their newer scopes and that's a tic better IQ than even my current one.

For long range shooting, I am a believer in ED and Super ED glass to tame the CA inherent in high magnification scopes, especially if you're going to spend a lot of time looking through the scope, like we do in F-class competition.
 
I would like it - if you can explain WHY you think FFP is ..."impractical".
Because for long range hunting, the reticle can become so large, when zoomed in, that it covers up the animal. Due to this, most FFP scope use an very thin reticle, and this can present problems at low light in close range situations, or when quick target acquisition is needed.
Besides, most of us are using ballistic software and dialing for shots that are further than our "comfort zone" (my own term that I used for shots that don't require dialing). I'm not going to use hold-overs for long shots, so having a reticle that stays the same proportion through the zoom range isn't important. Having a reticle that doesn't cover up the animal is very important, though.
 
Yeah, that "feature" has been conquered some time back. What people do now is use a reticle with a perspective that changes with the magnification. So for instance at low power the middle part of the crosshairs looks solid but as you zoom in, a new reticle is revealed that does not subtend much of the target or animal. This really works well in variables with a large zoom ratio.
 
Yeah, that "feature" has been conquered some time back. What people do now is use a reticle with a perspective that changes with the magnification. So for instance at low power the middle part of the crosshairs looks solid but as you zoom in, a new reticle is revealed that does not subtend much of the target or animal. This really works well in variables with a large zoom ratio.
I'll stick with SFP for hunting
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top